The defendant in an Ohio Vehicular Homicide/Vehicular Assault case filed a motion to suppress the results of his blood test. Blood test results may be suppressed for various reasons. In this case, the defendant argues the blood test did not comply with the requirements of the Ohio Revised Code and the Ohio Administrative Code.
A recent appellate case involves two legal issues which are often litigated in Vehicular Homicide and Vehicular Assault cases in Ohio. The first issue is the admissibility of expert witness testimony. The second issue is whether the jury should be instructed about the option of finding the defendant guilty of a lesser offense. The case is State v. Horst.
A former Pennsylvania state trooper was involved in a two-vehicle automobile crash, and the driver of the other vehicle died as a result. The former trooper, Joseph Yuran, was charged with Aggravated Vehicular Homicide as a second-degree felony and Operating a Vehicle under the Influence (OVI). Yuran pled guilty to those charges, and the judge imposed a prison term of 7 years to 10.5 years. Yuran appealed the sentence to the 11th District Court of Appeals, claiming the sentence was unlawful.
The law governing DUI (called ‘OVI’ in Ohio) is going to change. House Bill 37, signed by Governor Mike DeWine, becomes law on April 9, 2025. The legislation changes four separate areas of law: (1) Driving privileges and ignition interlock devices for OVI license suspensions; (2) Financial penalties for OVI convictions; (3) Oral fluid testing in OVI cases; and (4) Aggravated Vehicular Homicide penalties when a defendant has prior OVI convictions. This article addresses the changes in that order.
According to this news article, a truck driver lost control of his truck, collided with four other vehicles, and caused the deaths of three people. The truck driver was charged with three counts of Aggravated Vehicular Homicide, three counts of Vehicular Manslaughter, and three counts of DUI (called ‘OVI’ in Ohio). Why was the truck driver charged with multiple offenses, and can he be sentenced on all the charges?
In Ohio, there is a difference between a ‘vehicle’ and a ‘motor vehicle’. In cases of Vehicular Homicide and Vehicular Assault, the difference matters. The Ohio Supreme Court recently decided an Aggravated Vehicular Assault case in which the defendant’s guilt hinged on the definition of ‘motor vehicle’. The Court’s decision affects both vehicular assault and vehicular homicide cases.
After a domestic dispute, an Ohio woman intentionally hit a man with her car and was charged with Aggravated Vehicular Assault. According to a recent story by WHOTV7, the woman drove her SUV over a sidewalk and into a yard to hit the man. That does sound intentional. When it comes to vehicular crimes in Ohio, is intent necessary?
The issue of venue recently arose in an Ohio Vehicular Homicide case. As reported by the Leader-Telegram, the defendant was accused of hitting two highway workers in Clark County. As a result of the collision, one worker died, and the other was seriously injured. The defense attorney filed a motion for change of venue. What is venue, and when can it be changed?
Continue Reading
What sentence is Henry Ruggs III facing? The (former) wide receiver for the Las Vegas Raiders was recently involved in a collision which killed one person and injured another. He was charged with multiple offenses, including the Nevada equivalents of Aggravated Vehicular Homicide and Aggravated Vehicular Assault. The Ruggs incident may leave inquisitive Ohio residents wondering what the potential sentences are for Vehicular Homicide and Vehicular Assault in Ohio. If you are one of those inquisitive Ohio residents, you need not wonder any longer.
Cases of Vehicular Homicide and Vehicular Assault often involve testimony regarding accident investigation and accident reconstruction. Accident investigation is the collection of evidence at the crash site, and this activity is typically not considered the domain of expert testimony. Accident reconstruction is the use of scientific methods to determine the cause of the accident, so testimony on this subject is ordinarily considered expert testimony. A recent Ohio case illustrates the expert nature of accident reconstruction testimony.
Columbus OVI/DUI Attorney Blog